Posted by Benis on 8/28/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 8/28/2017 4:56:00 PM (view original):
My other recommendation: have a group of players (say, 50 D1 caliber guys) become available in the 2nd recruiting session (they are all newly discovered players and/or guys who reclassified). The second recruiting session is an absolute wasteland in D1 -- after the first cycle runs through, it is almost impossible to find quality recruits.

The "recruiting odds" system has done a great job of creating real recruiting battles because even if you are behind, you can do enough to hope that the dice rolls your way. But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. I'm not talking about having a bunch of 5 star players show up -- just having quality midmajor players would be a huge improvement.

It also makes me gunshy about switching jobs because I know that the second session will be worthless and I will have to play out a wasted season with players signed by SIMAI and crappy second session recruits. At least under 2.0, I could take over a crappy team and immediately go to work on my first recruiting class and lose with my guys and be invested in their development.

I could buy in to this idea. But not for teams that lose battles - I think that's part of the risk. And you probably don't have much money left anyway...

But I think this could really help with job changes (which discourage moving up). Or for teams hit by EEs.

However, this seems like a major change and not really what OP was going for here. I say just fix the nat champs page and be done with it. I'm not a programmer but this seems like it could be done in less than a day's worth of work. If not then Seble must have a spent a bajillion hours into 3.0.

I almost never post (or read the forums) any longer. But, I like this idea. Here is a simply way to make this happen, take either half, or a quarter, or maybe even all the lates, and don't show them until the second round. That would make it sort of an easy fix, and this fix MIGHT (sorry for the caps, but wanted to stress the nature of the word 'might') also fix 50-75% of the EE and the job switching issues, which would be a remarkable 'small' change.

Posted by oldresorter on 8/31/2017 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/28/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 8/28/2017 4:56:00 PM (view original):
My other recommendation: have a group of players (say, 50 D1 caliber guys) become available in the 2nd recruiting session (they are all newly discovered players and/or guys who reclassified). The second recruiting session is an absolute wasteland in D1 -- after the first cycle runs through, it is almost impossible to find quality recruits.

The "recruiting odds" system has done a great job of creating real recruiting battles because even if you are behind, you can do enough to hope that the dice rolls your way. But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. I'm not talking about having a bunch of 5 star players show up -- just having quality midmajor players would be a huge improvement.

It also makes me gunshy about switching jobs because I know that the second session will be worthless and I will have to play out a wasted season with players signed by SIMAI and crappy second session recruits. At least under 2.0, I could take over a crappy team and immediately go to work on my first recruiting class and lose with my guys and be invested in their development.

I could buy in to this idea. But not for teams that lose battles - I think that's part of the risk. And you probably don't have much money left anyway...

But I think this could really help with job changes (which discourage moving up). Or for teams hit by EEs.

However, this seems like a major change and not really what OP was going for here. I say just fix the nat champs page and be done with it. I'm not a programmer but this seems like it could be done in less than a day's worth of work. If not then Seble must have a spent a bajillion hours into 3.0.

I almost never post (or read the forums) any longer. But, I like this idea. Here is a simply way to make this happen, take either half, or a quarter, or maybe even all the lates, and don't show them until the second round. That would make it sort of an easy fix, and this fix MIGHT (sorry for the caps, but wanted to stress the nature of the word 'might') also fix 50-75% of the EE and the job switching issues, which would be a remarkable 'small' change.

There is also a resource problem. At D1,not so much D2. With the way the game is designed, it's almost impossible to fill many roster spots, at 3, you try 2 signees, four, same, five, you try 3... and you get battles everywhere...

Isn't the idea to "get battles everywhere"?

Posted by oldresorter on 8/31/2017 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/28/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 8/28/2017 4:56:00 PM (view original):
My other recommendation: have a group of players (say, 50 D1 caliber guys) become available in the 2nd recruiting session (they are all newly discovered players and/or guys who reclassified). The second recruiting session is an absolute wasteland in D1 -- after the first cycle runs through, it is almost impossible to find quality recruits.

The "recruiting odds" system has done a great job of creating real recruiting battles because even if you are behind, you can do enough to hope that the dice rolls your way. But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. I'm not talking about having a bunch of 5 star players show up -- just having quality midmajor players would be a huge improvement.

It also makes me gunshy about switching jobs because I know that the second session will be worthless and I will have to play out a wasted season with players signed by SIMAI and crappy second session recruits. At least under 2.0, I could take over a crappy team and immediately go to work on my first recruiting class and lose with my guys and be invested in their development.

I could buy in to this idea. But not for teams that lose battles - I think that's part of the risk. And you probably don't have much money left anyway...

But I think this could really help with job changes (which discourage moving up). Or for teams hit by EEs.

However, this seems like a major change and not really what OP was going for here. I say just fix the nat champs page and be done with it. I'm not a programmer but this seems like it could be done in less than a day's worth of work. If not then Seble must have a spent a bajillion hours into 3.0.

I almost never post (or read the forums) any longer. But, I like this idea. Here is a simply way to make this happen, take either half, or a quarter, or maybe even all the lates, and don't show them until the second round. That would make it sort of an easy fix, and this fix MIGHT (sorry for the caps, but wanted to stress the nature of the word 'might') also fix 50-75% of the EE and the job switching issues, which would be a remarkable 'small' change.

I've always said more of the top 100 caliber players should have the late preference. Very few of those guys should be signing early, in a system where they should know the high prestige programs may be bringing more to the table in the late session. I don't think it's a good idea to hide those HS players; but I do think the recruiting value of attention and effort should increase in the second session. A D prestige team investing heavily in a 4 star player who wants to sign late should be essentially throwing his effort in the trash.

That said, I've also made the case for adding roughly the number of EEs as new Juco players to be discovered in the second session. Not necessarily stars, but guys who can step in and be stopgaps off the bench for Big 6 programs. Higher IQ 650-750 range guys, who blossomed in a new set, or grew a few inches over the season and became legitimate D1 contributors out of the blue.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2017 12:18:00 PM (view original):
Isn't the idea to "get battles everywhere"?

Yes. The battles zorzii is talking about are by design, and they are not gameplay problems in and of themselves. That risk is the cost of targeting only very high demand commodities.

Posted by oldresorter on 8/31/2017 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/28/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 8/28/2017 4:56:00 PM (view original):
My other recommendation: have a group of players (say, 50 D1 caliber guys) become available in the 2nd recruiting session (they are all newly discovered players and/or guys who reclassified). The second recruiting session is an absolute wasteland in D1 -- after the first cycle runs through, it is almost impossible to find quality recruits.

The "recruiting odds" system has done a great job of creating real recruiting battles because even if you are behind, you can do enough to hope that the dice rolls your way. But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. I'm not talking about having a bunch of 5 star players show up -- just having quality midmajor players would be a huge improvement.

It also makes me gunshy about switching jobs because I know that the second session will be worthless and I will have to play out a wasted season with players signed by SIMAI and crappy second session recruits. At least under 2.0, I could take over a crappy team and immediately go to work on my first recruiting class and lose with my guys and be invested in their development.

I could buy in to this idea. But not for teams that lose battles - I think that's part of the risk. And you probably don't have much money left anyway...

But I think this could really help with job changes (which discourage moving up). Or for teams hit by EEs.

However, this seems like a major change and not really what OP was going for here. I say just fix the nat champs page and be done with it. I'm not a programmer but this seems like it could be done in less than a day's worth of work. If not then Seble must have a spent a bajillion hours into 3.0.

I almost never post (or read the forums) any longer. But, I like this idea. Here is a simply way to make this happen, take either half, or a quarter, or maybe even all the lates, and don't show them until the second round. That would make it sort of an easy fix, and this fix MIGHT (sorry for the caps, but wanted to stress the nature of the word 'might') also fix 50-75% of the EE and the job switching issues, which would be a remarkable 'small' change.

Good idea. Easy quick fix to a glaring issue in the new recruiting format.

Another easy fix to the terrible EE problem would be to UP the number of transfers and Juco's who are available for the last recruiting cycle. In my opinion, transfer's and juco's are the most unrealistic part of HD that could be an easy fix.

Posted by oldresorter on 8/31/2017 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/28/2017 6:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 8/28/2017 4:56:00 PM (view original):
My other recommendation: have a group of players (say, 50 D1 caliber guys) become available in the 2nd recruiting session (they are all newly discovered players and/or guys who reclassified). The second recruiting session is an absolute wasteland in D1 -- after the first cycle runs through, it is almost impossible to find quality recruits.

The "recruiting odds" system has done a great job of creating real recruiting battles because even if you are behind, you can do enough to hope that the dice rolls your way. But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. I'm not talking about having a bunch of 5 star players show up -- just having quality midmajor players would be a huge improvement.

It also makes me gunshy about switching jobs because I know that the second session will be worthless and I will have to play out a wasted season with players signed by SIMAI and crappy second session recruits. At least under 2.0, I could take over a crappy team and immediately go to work on my first recruiting class and lose with my guys and be invested in their development.

I could buy in to this idea. But not for teams that lose battles - I think that's part of the risk. And you probably don't have much money left anyway...

But I think this could really help with job changes (which discourage moving up). Or for teams hit by EEs.

However, this seems like a major change and not really what OP was going for here. I say just fix the nat champs page and be done with it. I'm not a programmer but this seems like it could be done in less than a day's worth of work. If not then Seble must have a spent a bajillion hours into 3.0.

I almost never post (or read the forums) any longer. But, I like this idea. Here is a simply way to make this happen, take either half, or a quarter, or maybe even all the lates, and don't show them until the second round. That would make it sort of an easy fix, and this fix MIGHT (sorry for the caps, but wanted to stress the nature of the word 'might') also fix 50-75% of the EE and the job switching issues, which would be a remarkable 'small' change.

No.

Posted by l80r20 on 8/31/2017 6:39:00 PM (view original):
"But the inability to find a decent Plan B in the second recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles."

I think it would be more accurate to say that the inability to set up decent Plan B's in the first recruiting stage hurts the losers of those battles. Waiting until the second stage and trying to start from scratch is a losing strategy, a fact that hasn't yet sunk in with a surprising number of guys. I trust Seble sees it okay, though, and will resist what is really just a scheme to artificially mitigate recruiting failure.

You need to play D1 to understand, you have choices to make and sometimes, winning battles comes first. And yeah, you could sign players but the game is about getting players that will help you to win, not lose.

So you don't have to make choices at D2/D3? Is D2/D3 NOT about getting player that will help you win?

You're posting nonsense because it's spud. Or maybe because you believe it. Personally, I think D1 is different but we're not comparing Chutes and Ladders to brain surgery. The concept is the same.

"That said, I've also made the case for adding roughly the number of EEs as new Juco players to be discovered in the second session. Not necessarily stars, but guys who can step in and be stopgaps off the bench for Big 6 programs. Higher IQ 650-750 range guys, who blossomed in a new set, or grew a few inches over the season and became legitimate D1 contributors out of the blue."

Bah. I always thought you were a live-with-the-consequences-of-your-choices kind of guy ... there should be risks in shooting for the best commodity ...

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2017 6:48:00 PM (view original):
So you don't have to make choices at D2/D3? Is D2/D3 NOT about getting player that will help you win?

You're posting nonsense because it's spud. Or maybe because you believe it. Personally, I think D1 is different but we're not comparing Chutes and Ladders to brain surgery. The concept is the same.

Mike : It's truly different, D2 except for the waiting sometimes gives you a lot more options and strategies. D1 is about the top 100 and hoping not to get challenged.

Posted by zorzii on 8/31/2017 8:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2017 6:48:00 PM (view original):
So you don't have to make choices at D2/D3? Is D2/D3 NOT about getting player that will help you win?

You're posting nonsense because it's spud. Or maybe because you believe it. Personally, I think D1 is different but we're not comparing Chutes and Ladders to brain surgery. The concept is the same.

Mike : It's truly different, D2 except for the waiting sometimes gives you a lot more options and strategies. D1 is about the top 100 and hoping not to get challenged.

zorzi: I accept that it's different but is hoping not to get challenged on a Top 100 really that different than hoping to not get challenged on a #101 center? Or hoping that a D1/D2 don't come after him?

Again, we're not comparing oranges to shark attack victims, we're comparing oranges to tangerines. It's NOT THAT DIFFERENT.

To be clear, everyone of us, regardless of level, hope to spend the minimum amount of resources on the best player possible. It's the same at all three levels. You can choose to battle or you can choose to find another, lesser player. That's at every level. The biggest difference, at D1, you have the resources to battle for any player you want. At D2/D3, sometimes the best course of action is to move on. But, of course, that might be the best action at D1.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/31/2017 8:59:00 PM (view original):
To be clear, everyone of us, regardless of level, hope to spend the minimum amount of resources on the best player possible. It's the same at all three levels. You can choose to battle or you can choose to find another, lesser player. That's at every level. The biggest difference, at D1, you have the resources to battle for any player you want. At D2/D3, sometimes the best course of action is to move on. But, of course, that might be the best action at D1.

Nah.